lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: the bible = the tree of the knowledge of good and evil () Jesus = the tree of life
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 03-01-2004, 02:05 PM   #41
toms
v0.9
 
toms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: uk swamp
Posts: 3,490
i don't know anything about the US constitution... but if seperation of the church and state isn't in the constitution then it damn well should be. You only have to look at a lot of the non-secular islamic states to see the trouble a country can get into when church and state become too closely linked.

I think the christianity thing is a bit like the reverse discrimination thing. When you have something that is way, way more widespread and powerful than anything else then it seems acceptable to treat it slightly differently. I can't see that people are saying that we should throw out all christianity for islam or anything like that. THey are just saying that we need to have less of a focus on christianity and more on other religions. This is just an attempt to add some balance, not saying that other religions are better.

With the number of attacks on minorities going up by 100s or percent since 9/11 i would support people who say there needs to be a bit more understanding and tollerance of minorities.



Playing: Link to the Past, Astroboy, Kario Kart, Mario World (Micro) KOTOR 2: Sith Lords (Xbox) Morrowind (PC)
toms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-01-2004, 05:38 PM   #42
rccar328
Forumite
 
rccar328's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Right where I should be.
Posts: 567
Quote:
i don't know anything about the US constitution... but if seperation of the church and state isn't in the constitution then it damn well should be. You only have to look at a lot of the non-secular islamic states to see the trouble a country can get into when church and state become too closely linked.
What the US Constitution says is that, "Congress shall make no law reguarding an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free excercise thereof." What that means is that the government cannot officially endorse a religion, require citizens to participate in a religion, or prohibit citizens from excercising their religion. I believe (I could be wrong about where it came from) that the phrase "separation of church and state" was taken from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson...and somehow people assumed that it was the Law of the Land.

I believe that the establishment clause is increasingly being misinterpreted to the point that its enforcement is violating the free excercise clause...I've read of several cases of this - prohibition of student-initiated, voluntary prayer in schools, the abolishment of religious (mainly Christian) clubs, and even one case where a school principle threatened to have arrested anyone who said "Jesus" or "God" at a graduation ceremony...whether in a speech or not.


Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
~John F. Kennedy

True Conservatism


Last edited by rccar328; 03-01-2004 at 08:18 PM.
rccar328 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-01-2004, 07:51 PM   #43
Michael111
Lurker
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2
A book is not 'Holy'

If it contains the knowledge of evil, Satan, the devil, demons, dark prophecy, suffering, death, curses, superstitious numbers, conspiracy, the wholesale slaughter of innocent people, rituals involving the blood of murdered animals...

I say thank you Jesus for opening my eyes

the bible = the tree of the knowledge of good and evil

poison fruit

Love to all as we overcome the darkness together, and reach for the tree of life - Jesus Christ

Michael111
Michael111 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-02-2004, 02:37 PM   #44
Ray Jones
[armleglegarmhead]
 
Ray Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: digital
Posts: 8,250
10 year veteran! LF Jester Helpful! Forum Veteran 
nothing offensive ..

but does this actually made sense?


Ray Jones is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-02-2004, 03:57 PM   #45
rccar328
Forumite
 
rccar328's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Right where I should be.
Posts: 567
Quote:
but does this actually made sense?
Well...I started to understand what he was trying to say (didn't agree with it, but kinda understood) until he threw in the part about Jesus...

It sounds to me like he's saying, "Jesus good, Bible bad."






it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever...
rccar328 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-03-2004, 08:16 AM   #46
taoistimmortal
Rookie
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: chicago il usa
Posts: 45
the bible = the tree of the knowledge of good and evil

poison fruit

But it does make sense. What micheal111 is trying to say I believe is that the "devilry" contained in the bible taints the bible and therefore he has made the connection that the bible is the beginning of the knowledge of good and evil which in symbolic terms would make it the apple. Although I think he should be more forthcoming with his reason, namely why he thinks the good portions of the bible are tainted by the accounts of evil, the basic premise behind his assertion is very simple. Whether it is rational or logical is a different question.

Maybe what he is trying to say is shed the weight of the laws of the bible for we already know them anyways. They are in our blood so to speak. He sounds like an old time mystic in a way you know find the true path to Christ by shedding the superfluity that Christianity has acquired over the years, but then I can understand how and why most Christians would think that the true path to Jesus and God is through the bible.

Have you ever heard of the Albingensians or the Cathari; early Christian cults that were branded heretics by the Catholic church and so therefore stamped out. Maybe you know this quote by one of the generals given the task of massacreing the peoples of the Provence region in France. When asked by one of his commanders how they would know the heretics from the true believers he replied "Kill them all and let God sort them out"

A disclaimer: by writng that qoute I don't mean to imply anything about Christianity and hypocrisy. It's a quote that I have always found appallingly enjoyable.

[quote] I believe that the establishment clause is increasingly being misinterpreted to the point that its enforcement is violating the free excercise clause...

Your probably right. I personally see it as a legal tug of war between opposing views, and I can understand why it would irritate you because it restricts your freedom on the specific front it deals with. If I ever passed you on the lawn of state run institution rccar praying with a group of friends I would not be offended. But that is what it comes down to. Why do you think some people are offended to the point of legal action? You have touched on this a bit in your other posts in this thread. Truthfully it seems like dangerous waters to me. The swirling belligerance of hatred and anger swelling to the point of it's capacity. I don't think it will ever end. Tolerance and intolerance. The laws of God and the laws of man. Yes very dangerous waters indeed.


the vision of a future bliss annihilation or transcendence
taoistimmortal is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-03-2004, 12:14 PM   #47
ShadowTemplar
Heathen
 
ShadowTemplar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 1,068
Why do people dislike Christianity?

A question often asked on these boards, I feel that it's time to give my .02€ on it:

The question in its full length is:

Why do people dislike Christianity more than e.g. Islam?

I think that the answer is that the people on these boards come mostly from countries with a long Christian history. Since these Christians have grown up on their 'home turf', so to speak, they have never had their beliefs challenged in any serious fashion during their childhood. Such lack of opposition means that they confuse fact and faith.

Z. B. some of the posters here have the bad habit of talking about Jesus's ressurection as though it was an actual, historical event. The actual historical events surrounding Jesus-called-Christ are vaguely documented at best. Mixing hard facts and personal interpretations is a bad habit. When this is pointed out, most of the people in question respond that 'that's what they believe'. Fine, but it's still an interpretation, and should be kept seperate from the supporting evidence.

By confusing faith and reality in their arguments, they seem to imply that their faith is true or that the facts are a matter of faith. Both of these implications are hugely offensive to the rational onlooker, because they discredit experiment and reason as the final arbitrators of conflict, and replace them with what is viewed from the outside as childish superstitions.

This effect is akin to the irritation felt when a hardline Marxist talks about a revolution somewhere in history as though it was part of the chain of events predicted by Marx, that would lead to Communism. The error here, of course, is that Marx' models are largely unproven, and thus cannot be used to present the historical facts of a given revolution. Marx' models must be considered seperately from the historical facts.

By contrast, a follower of some other religion (a Satanist, for example) will usually be much more skilled at debating properly (seperating facts and opinion, not losing control of her emotions, etc.), and more skilled in refuting the most common counter-arguments to her points, simply because she is in sharp training because she has had far more opportunities to swap views with someone she doesn't nessecarily agree with.

So where the followers of a religion have been raised on said religion's own turf, they come off as ignorant, brainwashed zealots compared to those who have been raised on foreign turf.

Of course these are general considerations. There is an astonishing variation within these norms.

Oh, and BTW I find that seperation between Church and State is a bad idea, because the Church cannot be effectively oppressed if it is independent. And if the Church is not oppressed, then the State is slave to the Church. There is no middle road.

ShadowTemplar is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-03-2004, 01:58 PM   #48
Feanaro
Junior Member
 
Feanaro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Batcave
Posts: 321
[
Quote:
By confusing faith and reality in their arguments, they seem to imply that their faith is true or that the facts are a matter of faith. Both of these implications are hugely offensive to the rational onlooker, because they discredit experiment and reason as the final arbitrators of conflict, and replace them with what is viewed from the outside as childish superstitions.
Then wouldn't everyone confuse faith as fact then? Not just christians on this thread. When you sit in a chair? It's not fact that it will hold you up, you have faith in that chair, that it will hold you up.
And wouldn't you say that to those that do believe in God and that Jesus rose from the dead would be offended just the same as a"rational" onlooker? with statements saying
Quote:
Jesus is overated. Sure, the man may have had a few bright moments, but i can off hand name at least a couple dozen people more praise-worthy than he
Wouldn't you say your faith in this statement would be offensive to christians?


Feanaro is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-03-2004, 02:05 PM   #49
ET Warrior
PhD in horribleness
 
ET Warrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Evil League of Evil
Posts: 9,405
LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally posted by Feanaro
When you sit in a chair? It's not fact that it will hold you up, you have faith in that chair, that it will hold you up.
Well, it actually is a fact. You know that when you sit down your body will exert a normal force on the chair and because of Newton's third law, that chair will exert the same normal force back onto you.



ET Warrior is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-03-2004, 03:30 PM   #50
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally posted by Feanaro
Then wouldn't everyone confuse faith as fact then? Not just christians on this thread. When you sit in a chair? It's not fact that it will hold you up, you have faith in that chair, that it will hold you up.
There are facts and there are theories (I think Gould first said this). A fact isn't necessarily some stepping stone to a theory or vice versa. They can exist independently from each other. When Einstein reworked some of Newton's theories of gravity to come up with a better one, apples didn't start floating in mid-fall and cows didn't begin flying. Gravity is a fact. Yet how we explain gravity is a theory.

That the chair will support a person is a fact based on observable evidence. One observes more chairs in a particular configuration of a particular construction that will support than will not. Therefore, it is wise to conclude that the probabilities that a chair that meets an individual's observed/learned criteria are worth the risk to sit down.

Religion doesn't meet those criteria. Particularly the bible, if you note the parallels to Near Eastern mythology that I outlined in the Bible: myth or truth thread.

Jesus Christ, in particular, doesn't meet those criteria for the reasons I mentioned elswhere (perhaps it was this thread) and ShadowTemplar mentioned above.

Quote:
Originally posted by Feanaro
And wouldn't you say that to those that do believe in God and that Jesus rose from the dead would be offended just the same as a"rational" onlooker?
Perhaps. But there are some with whom it is one's duty to offend if it applies to critical reasoning and progress. Consideration of the sensibilities of others shouldn't be the reason for perpetuating ignorance as long as the remarks are not ad hominem in nature.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-03-2004, 03:36 PM   #51
taoistimmortal
Rookie
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: chicago il usa
Posts: 45
[QUOTE] By Feanaro: Then wouldn't everyone confuse faith as fact then? Not just christians on this thread. When you sit in a chair? It's not fact that it will hold you up, you have faith in that chair, that it will hold you up.

I just dont have any faith in that argument Feanaro. It may be a trust that you put in the chair but it definately, even if you want to call it by the name of faith, does not come near to the significance of a religious faith. They are two very different things, additionally because a chair is a man made object, and if it breaks it is either the owner or the builder's fault. Now if you had the belief or the faith that the chair was standing through the power of God then it would be a different matter, but as it stands, the chair that is, as you are sitting in it, I think it is a trust that allows you to go on using it without suffering a fear of it failing you. Or Newton's law as ET mentioned.

Maybe you dont understand that faith and reality must be seperate to the rational or reasoning mind, and that faith is in a different realm seperated from the actual. Anyone that brings their faith into their reasoning is either a gambler or a beleiver in something.

Which I guess is everyone. Yes everyone operates on a faith of some kind. Maybe it has something to do with chance and the unknowable future.

But that still doesnt change the fact that there is a distinct difference between faith and reality... hmmm

but maybe faith and reality are not true opposites and they shouldnt be thought of in this manner.

S**t now I'm caught in a Cartesian loop. Skepticism leads to nothing but more questions.

Anyway, the emphsis needs to be on reality, not faith, for ones perception of the real world(no trademark) to hold sway over ones belief in the apparent world.


the vision of a future bliss annihilation or transcendence
taoistimmortal is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-04-2004, 05:50 AM   #52
ShadowTemplar
Heathen
 
ShadowTemplar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 1,068
Quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jesus is overated. Sure, the man may have had a few bright moments, but i can off hand name at least a couple dozen people more praise-worthy than he
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Wouldn't you say your faith in this statement would be offensive to christians?
Not at all, since I can off-hand name a dozen people more praise-worthy. Gutenberg, Curie, Mendelejev, Bohr, Einstein, Brahe, Gallileo, Copernicus, Kepler, Voltaire, Rømer, Newton, Kelvin. The list goes on.

That said, I never claimed that rational thinking wouldn't offend religious zealots, merely that dogmatic thinking offends rational people.


Last edited by ShadowTemplar; 03-04-2004 at 06:32 AM.
ShadowTemplar is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-04-2004, 06:53 AM   #53
Tyrion
nothing is real
 
Tyrion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: no one I think is in my tree, I mean it must be high or low
Posts: 6,917
LF Jester Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally posted by rccar328
It sounds to me like he's saying, "Jesus good, Bible bad. "
I think that he's saying that the Bible is both good and bad- because it houses both good knowledge(God, Jesus, Crucifiction, ect) and bad knowledge(the Devil, betrayal, death).

I guess Jesus is supposed to be the Guide in reading the book of good and evil..at least that's what I get.



Tyrion is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-04-2004, 01:03 PM   #54
toms
v0.9
 
toms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: uk swamp
Posts: 3,490
but didn't jesus TELL all his disciples about his trials with the devil and so forth? Surely this means that jesus WANTED people to know about the devil and evil?

I'm of the opinion that jesus (if he was real) might well have been good, but by man attempting to write down the will of god the bible has become (unwittingly) the cause of a lot of evil. But i don't think that is what he meant.



Playing: Link to the Past, Astroboy, Kario Kart, Mario World (Micro) KOTOR 2: Sith Lords (Xbox) Morrowind (PC)
toms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-04-2004, 04:17 PM   #55
rccar328
Forumite
 
rccar328's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Right where I should be.
Posts: 567
Quote:
I'm of the opinion that jesus (if he was real) might well have been good, but by man attempting to write down the will of god the bible has become (unwittingly) the cause of a lot of evil. But i don't think that is what he meant.
As far as the Bible goes, I think that the evil comes from men misinterpreting the Bible (i.e. the Crusades). But I don't think that's what he meant, either.
rccar328 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > JediKnight Series > Community > Senate Chambers > the bible = the tree of the knowledge of good and evil () Jesus = the tree of life

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:12 AM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.